Could a DClinPsych from the UK allow me to be licensed in the US as a psychologist?

[aspiringpsych3384]

---

Members don't see this ad.

I am an American citizen from California with my BA in psychology. I currently live in Melbourne and am considering applying to the Uni of Melbourne for the 4 year combined MA/PhD program in clinical psych, and also the DClinPsych programs in the UK. I really want to study abroad for my grad program, but also don't know where I want to settle long term. I love the idea of studying abroad for grad, but want to make sure my degree isn't useless should I return to California to practice as a psychologist.

I am wondering if for example, I compete the 4 year program in Australia, would that be the equivalent of the PsyD in the US? It is the same amount of time for completion, but don't know if that makes sense or not. I have tried contacting the APA board but haven't gotten a response yet. If someone could please shed some light on this topic I would be forever grateful. I am really stressing out over where to focus on applying to! Thanks heaps

Also, does anyone know any major education differences for Australia Vs UK vs US? Any of which are preferable?

 

[WisNeuro]

This will vary quite a bit from state to state. I would imagine it would be extremely difficult to prove equivalency to some state boards. If you could, it will take a lot of documentation. Additionally, you'll still probably be locked out of some jobs. But, California has pretty lax restrictions, kind of the Wild West, anyone can do what they want, from any quality school.

But, in the end, most of us would strongly advise that you do your graduate training in the country that you'd like to practice in. Much easier. As for boards, I'd contact several state boards to see what they say, rather than APA. APA does not license you, states do.

 

[PsyDr]

It is extremely unlikely that you would be able to get licensed in the states without substantial retraining. There are differences between UK and US training.

Keep in mind that your application is judged by a simple state bureaucrat who is incentivized to say "NO". They are simply checking off boxes. Any difference is not well received. They approve a difference and someone ends up hurt.... that's on them. They deny any differences... they have no punishments.

At a bare minimum, you'd have to take additional coursework in the US to meet requirements. And you'd likely have to do an internship and post doc in the USA.

Don't even know if ASPPB would allow you to sit for the EPPP.

 

[sfgucadoc]

Anecdotal but relevant - I was speaking to a colleague yesterday. She did a PhD in Brazil and practiced there for 15 years. She decided to come to the US. To get licensed, she ended up having to do a post-doc and jump through a lot of hoops to get her PhD validated here and then get the board to accept it in TX.

Similar situation for a colleague with a PhD from Cambridge U.

I strongly suggest you go to a US school if you plan to practice here.

 

[AcronymAllergy]

Agreed with the above posts; if at all possible, try to complete your Ph.D./Psy.D. in the US if you're thinking about practicing in the US. Anecdotally, it seems to be a easier to go in the opposite direction (i.e., educated in the US and then practice abroad), as I know a handful of folks who've done this. However, my experience is significantly impacted by sample bias (i.e., I only really know psychologists who've been educated in the US).

If pursuing your doctorate in the US just isn't an option, your best bet is to check with the CA (or whichever state) board of psychology specifically, rather than with APA. But like PsyDr mentioned, they may be strongly incentivized to say "no."

 

[deleted343839]

Also, does anyone know any major education differences for Australia Vs UK vs US? Any of which are preferable?

As others have mentioned, "preferable" is relative to where you see yourself establishing your career.

If you are interested in international psychology, you might check out APA Division 52: International Psychology (Division 52)

If you're interested in studying abroad for its own sake, a master's degree would be an expensive but feasible way to go about this before committing to a geographical location for the PhD. But more practically speaking, consider delaying your application until you're ready to return to the US or have committed to living outside the US long-term.

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

Almost assuredly no, at least training over there and coming back to the USA. Doctoral training in the UK is more about research, and their standards for practice are quite different.

Your best bet is to either get ALL of your training and then move abroad, or you can train abroad and accept that you can't work as a psychologist in the USA. The only place I've seen as strict as the USA is Canada.

It's a much easier idea in theory than in practice.

 

[PsychPhDone]

CA BoP:

Applicants for licensure that apply after on or January 1, 2020, must possess an earned doctorate degree in psychology, educational psychology, or education with the field of specialization in counseling psychology or educational psychology from a college or institution of higher education that is accredited by a regional accrediting agency recognized by the United States Department of Education.

 

[PsychPhDone]

Also you can email CA BoP directly but be forewarned that it might take a few tries before they fully answer your question:
[email protected]

 

[sfgucadoc]

Probably worth revisiting a bit of history.

CA used to have VERY loosey-goosey rules about what constituted a "school." At one point, you only needed to have $50K in assets to set up a "school." So MANY versions of Bill & Ted's Excellent School of Psychology sprung up across CA. And BoP allowed people to get licensed even if their alma mater wasn't regionally accredited, let alone APA-accredited.

About 15-20 years ago, the state became stricter and many of these wide spaces in the academic road folded, after graduating a number of sketchy practitioners. I'm sure that fact is only tangentially related to the fact that BoP sent me a pamphlet called "Therapy Never Includes Sex" along with my new license.

It appears that BoP has (thankfully) gotten even stricter on who can sit for licensure.

Why buy yourself a lot of heartache and heartburn by doing a doctorate overseas if you may want to practice in CA? I assume an overseas doctorate will be $$$$ so sink that wad of cash into an *APA-accredited* PsyD program if you need to do that to get your training. Even better, apply to some funded programs (PhD or PsyD) with some unfunded PsyD programs as safety schools.

My .02.

YMMV

 

[clausewitz2]

I know exactly one DClinPsych from the UK who did this in Pennsylvania. Caveats: 1) they got licensed here almost ten years ago 2) they work at a big AMC, so there may be an institutional waiver scheme like there is for foreign MDs in similar settings.

 

[AbnormalPsych]

BoP sent me a pamphlet called "Therapy Never Includes Sex" along with my new license.

If y'all are curious:

Therapy Never Includes Sexual Behavior - California Department of Consumer Affairs

www.dca.ca.gov

 

[AcronymAllergy]

If y'all are curious:

Therapy Never Includes Sexual Behavior - California Department of Consumer Affairs

www.dca.ca.gov

I think it's great that they'd provide this information to the public. It's disturbing that they believe they need to send it to providers.

 

[WisNeuro]

I think it's great that they'd provide this information to the public. It's disturbing that they believe they need to send it to providers.

I don't know, I think in most states, inappropriate relationships with patients is still one of the top reasons for board complaints. Apparently there's a small percentage of us that really need that ethical guideline drilled in.

 

[AcronymAllergy]

I don't know, I think in most states, inappropriate relationships with patients is still one of the top reasons for board complaints. Apparently there's a small percentage of us that really need that ethical guideline drilled in.

Oh, I don't doubt that it's needed, and I know inappropriate relationships are an ongoing problem. I still just think it's disturbing that providers need to be explicitly told not to have sex with their patients.

 

[WisNeuro]

Oh, I don't doubt that it's needed, and I know inappropriate relationships are an ongoing problem. I still just think it's disturbing that providers need to be explicitly told not to have sex with their patients.

Yeah, I don't think it's unique to MH providers though. In my internship VA, one of our units had a reputation due to multiple nurses getting into relationships with patients after d/c. The joke was "You know Doctors without borders? We have nurses without boundaries."

 

[PsychPhDone]

I think it's great that they'd provide this information to the public. It's disturbing that they believe they need to send it to providers.

It's gross.

We're sent the pamphlet so that if a patient tells us they had an inappropriate relationship or proposition from a former therapist, we have to give it to them and discuss.

The state law/ethics exam covers all the rules about this, too.

Also, it's gross.

 

[futureapppsy2]

Oh, I don't doubt that it's needed, and I know inappropriate relationships are an ongoing problem. I still just think it's disturbing that providers need to be explicitly told not to have sex with their patients.

A colleague of mine from postdoc did her internship at an extremely well-respected AMC in California in 2016. During orientation, she said they placed a heavy emphasis on not having sex with your patients, because a psychiatrist there had done exactly that the year before,

 

[BuckeyeLove]

I check my board site weekly. It's legit tied for #1 id say next to practicing outside of scope.

 

[WisNeuro]

I check my board site weekly. It's legit tied for #1 id say next to practicing outside of scope.

Scope issues are probably our #1, with inappropriate relationships (broadly defined, not all sexual) definitely being the #2. Most everything beyond those two are small numbers.

 

[BuckeyeLove]

Scope issues are probably our #1, with inappropriate relationships (broadly defined, not all sexual) definitely being the #2. Most everything beyond those two are small numbers.

Would that be something that would fall under the term "moral turpitude?" That's the descriptor I see all the time.

 

[Sanman]

Therapy Never Includes Sexual Behavior - California Department of Consumer Affairs

www.dca.ca.gov

Wait so I can't bill HMOs for my gigolo sessions with bored housewives? Damn, there goes my plan for private practice. I had the brochures printed up and everything. Glad I saw the pamphlet, I guess.

 

[WisNeuro]

Would that be something that would fall under the term "moral turpitude?" That's the descriptor I see all the time.

They don't use that in our board proceedings. Thankfully, they're pretty explicit about the nature of violations, and don't have to rely on some ambiguous statement.